What are the opening hours?

Monday 9am - 5pm Tuesday 9am - 5pm Thursday 9am - 5pm Friday 9am - 5pm

Conducto Law Office

Home
Philippines
Antipolo
Conducto Law Office

We welcome your inquiries and are ready to discuss how we can assist you.

We are a full-service law firm handling a wide range of practice areas such as Civil, Criminal, Corporate Litigation, Real Estate Transfer and Estate Tax, Family Law, Labor Law, Business and Tax Consultancy, Data Privacy, and Regulatory Compliance For questions about our services, case evaluations, or to schedule a consultation, you can reach us at [email protected] or message us here on Facebook.

09/06/2026

#𝗖𝗼𝗻𝗱𝘂𝗰𝗧𝗼𝗞𝗻𝗼𝘄 𝗟𝗲𝗴𝗮𝗹 𝗨𝗽𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗲 - 𝗦𝘂𝗽𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘁 𝗥𝘂𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗴𝗲𝗿𝘆 𝗖𝗹𝗮𝗶𝗺𝘀 𝗼𝗻 𝗮 𝗠𝗮𝗿𝗿𝗶𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗖𝗲𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗶𝘀 𝗡𝗼𝘁 𝗣𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘂𝗺𝗲𝗱 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗠𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗯𝗲 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗻

Can someone simply deny a marriage and have the marriage certificate erased from the records?

The Supreme Court recently said no—not without strong proof.

In 𝙎𝙖𝙣𝙩𝙤𝙨 𝙫. 𝙇𝙤𝙘𝙖𝙡 𝘾𝙞𝙫𝙞𝙡 𝙍𝙚𝙜𝙞𝙨𝙩𝙧𝙖𝙧 𝙤𝙛 𝙈𝙖𝙣𝙞𝙡𝙖, G.R. No. 265114, February 3, 2026, a woman asked the courts to cancel entries in a marriage certificate that showed she married a Japanese national in 2010. She claimed she never got married and that her signature on the certificate was forged. She said she only discovered the marriage record years later when she applied for a CENOMAR.

To support her claim, she presented witnesses who testified that she was elsewhere on the date of the alleged wedding. However, she failed to present stronger evidence such as employment records, expert handwriting analysis, or other independent proof that the signature was indeed forged. She also did not include the alleged husband as a party to the case.

Both the trial court and the Court of Appeals dismissed her petition, and the Supreme Court agreed.

According to the Court, a marriage certificate is an official government record and is presumed to be valid and authentic. Anyone claiming that it is fake carries the burden of proving forgery with clear and convincing evidence—not just personal denials or witness testimonies.

The Supreme Court emphasized that allegations of forgery must be supported by solid, independent evidence. Mere claims that "I did not sign it" are not enough to overturn an official document.

The Court also reminded the public that a petition to correct or cancel entries in civil records cannot be used as a shortcut to challenge the validity of a marriage.

Official documents enjoy a presumption of validity. If you claim that a document is forged, you must be prepared to prove it with strong and credible evidence. Follow us for more legal tidbits!

05/06/2026

Legal Explainer - 𝗤𝗨𝗢𝗥𝗨𝗠

𝗤𝘂𝗼𝗿𝘂𝗺 refers to the minimum number of members (for legislatures and non-stock coporations) or voting shares (for stock corporations) required to legally conduct a session, meeting, transact business, and pass valid bills, resolutions, and ordinances.

Article VI, Section 16 (2) of the 1987 Constitution provides that "[a] majority of each House [of Congress] shall constitute a quorum to do business, ...."

For LGUs, Section 53 (a) of the Local Government Code of 1991 states that "[a] majority of all the members of the sanggunian who have been elected and qualified shall constitute a quorum to transact official business", and Section 49 (b) says "[i]n the event of the inability of the regular presiding officer to preside at a sanggunian session, the members present and constituting a quorum shall elect from among themselves a temporary presiding officer."

For stock corporations, the 'quorum' referred to in Section 52 of the Corporation Code is based on the number of outstanding voting stocks. For nonstock corporations, only those who are actual, living members with voting rights shall be counted in determining the existence of a quorum during members' meetings. Dead members shall not be counted. (𝙏𝙖𝙣 𝙫. 𝙎𝙮𝙘𝙞𝙥, G.R. No. 153468, August 17, 2006)

Follow us for more legal knowledge delivered to you in real time!

03/06/2026

#𝗖𝗼𝗻𝗱𝘂𝗰𝗧𝗼𝗞𝗻𝗼𝘄 𝗟𝗲𝗴𝗮𝗹 𝗨𝗽𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗲 - 𝙎𝘾: 𝙃𝙤𝙨𝙩𝙞𝙡𝙚 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙄𝙣𝙩𝙞𝙢𝙞𝙙𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙀𝙣𝙫𝙞𝙧𝙤𝙣𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩 𝙗𝙮 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙒𝙞𝙛𝙚 𝙞𝙨 𝙖 𝙂𝙧𝙤𝙪𝙣𝙙 𝙛𝙤𝙧 𝙇𝙚𝙜𝙖𝙡 𝙎𝙚𝙥𝙖𝙧𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣

In the case of 𝙂𝙖𝙧𝙧𝙮 𝙂𝙤 𝙫𝙨. 𝙇𝙮𝙣𝙣 𝘾𝙝𝙖𝙣-𝙂𝙤, G.R. No. 243647, November 18, 2025, the Supreme Court ruled that the wife’s actions, taken together, created a hostile and intimidating environment for the husband. Here, the wife has constantly led in family finances, maligns the husband’s reputation, manipulates their children to compel him to provide more, and refuses to fix the marriage through counseling and other interventions, which prompted the husband to file a petition for legal separation on the ground of grossly abusive conduct.

The Supreme Court, in deciding the case, defined grossly abusive conduct as acts committed by a spouse against the other spouse, the latter’s child, or their common child which result in a hostile and intimidating environment for the other spouse, their children, and common children.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court granted the petition and remanded the case to the RTC for the dissolution and liquidation of the spouses’ property and to determine the grant of custody and support of their children.

Follow for more LEGAL updates!

01/06/2026

#𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐓𝐨𝐊𝐧𝐨𝐰 #𝐖𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐎𝐟𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐖𝐞𝐞𝐤: 𝐅𝐨𝐫𝐜𝐞 𝐌𝐚𝐣𝐞𝐮𝐫𝐞

Force Majeure is a French term which translates to “𝐬𝐮𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐨𝐫 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐜𝐞”, which refers to 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐆𝐨𝐝 𝐨𝐫 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬 𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐡𝐮𝐦𝐚𝐧 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥. Under Article 1174 of the Civil Code, it pertains to events which could not be foreseen, or which though foreseen, were inevitable.

The Code likewise enumerated fire, war, pestilence, unusual flood, locusts, earthquake, or others which are uncommon that could not have reasonably be foreseen, as extraordinary fortuitous events, 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐫𝐲 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐲 𝐭𝐨 𝐚𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭 the usual course of event.

Follow us for more legal updates.

27/05/2026

𝙀𝙞𝙙 𝙖𝙡-𝘼𝙙𝙝𝙖 𝙈𝙪𝙗𝙖𝙧𝙖𝙠! Conducto Law Office joins our Muslim brothers and sisters in celebrating the Festival of Sacrifice. May you and your loved ones have a joyful and blessed Eid al-Adha, and may your heart be filled with gratitude.

26/05/2026

📢 Pursuant to Presidential Proclamation No. 1264, Conducto Law Office will be closed on Wednesday, May 27, 2026, as our Muslim brothers and sisters celebrate Eid-al-Adha. 𝗢𝘂𝗿 𝗻𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹 𝗼𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗵𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘀 𝘄𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘂𝗺𝗲 𝗼𝗻 𝗧𝗵𝘂𝗿𝘀𝗱𝗮𝘆, 𝗠𝗮𝘆 𝟮𝟴, 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟲 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝟵:𝟬𝟬 𝗮.𝗺. 𝘁𝗼 𝟰:𝟯𝟬 𝗽.𝗺.

25/05/2026

#𝘾𝙤𝙣𝙙𝙪𝙘𝙏𝙤𝙆𝙣𝙤𝙬 𝗟𝗲𝗴𝗮𝗹 𝗨𝗽𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗲 - 𝗥𝗠𝗖 𝗡𝗼. 𝟰𝟳-𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟲: 𝘽𝙄𝙍 𝙎𝙞𝙢𝙥𝙡𝙞𝙛𝙞𝙚𝙨 𝙋𝙧𝙤𝙘𝙚𝙨𝙨 𝙛𝙤𝙧 𝘾𝙡𝙤𝙨𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝘽𝙪𝙨𝙞𝙣𝙚𝙨𝙨𝙚𝙨 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝘾𝙖𝙣𝙘𝙚𝙡𝙡𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙏𝙖𝙭 𝙍𝙚𝙜𝙞𝙨𝙩𝙧𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣

On May 19, 2026, the BIR has issued 𝗥𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗻𝘂𝗲 𝗠𝗲𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗮𝗻𝗱𝘂𝗺 𝗖𝗶𝗿𝗰𝘂𝗹𝗮𝗿 𝗡𝗼. 𝟬𝟰𝟳-𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟲, to simplify, standardize, and streamline the guidelines and procedures in the processing of applications for closure and/or cancellation of taxpayer’s business registration with the BIR, pursuant to the implementation of R.A. 11976, otherwise known as the “Ease of Paying Taxes Act”.

Under the Circular, the taxpayer shall apply his application with the required documents, either electronically or manually, to the concerned Revenue District Office (RDO) where the taxpayer’s Head or Branch Office is registered, or by sending using taxpayer’s official email address to the RDO’s official email address, or through the BIR’s electronic registration facilities.

Likewise, the Circular mandates the surrender of Original Certificate of Registration, Authority to Print, Notice to Issue Invoice, Accreditation Certificate and Permit to Use, and Electronic Invoicing/Receipting System Certificate and Permit to Transmit, together with the filing of all final short-period tax returns covering the period from the beginning of the taxable year up to the date of closure. In the event of no business activity in such period, the taxpayer shall file zero returns. Failure to submit documentary requirements, shall make the taxpayer liable for all their tax obligations, including the filing of tax returns and payment of taxes, and penalties.

Tax law is one of Conducto Law Office's specializations. Schedule today to speak to our tax lawyers.

22/05/2026

#𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐓𝐨𝐊𝐧𝐨𝐰 #𝐋𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥𝐔𝐩𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐞: 𝐒𝐂: 𝐍𝐨 𝐓𝐨𝐨𝐥𝐬 𝐍𝐞𝐞𝐝𝐞𝐝 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐋𝐞𝐠𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐨𝐟 𝐒𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐨𝐫 𝐌𝐚𝐧𝐮𝐚𝐥 𝐖𝐨𝐫𝐤

The Supreme Court ruled that the law 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐫𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐫𝐞 𝐚 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐨 𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐛𝐨𝐭𝐡 𝐬𝐮𝐛𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐜𝐚𝐩𝐢𝐭𝐚𝐥 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐢𝐧𝐯𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐦 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐨𝐨𝐥𝐬, 𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐩𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭, 𝐨𝐫 𝐦𝐚𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬. To require both substantial capitalization and investment in equipment for all forms of contracting would be impractical and inconsistent with industry practice, particularly where the services contracted are 𝐧𝐨𝐧-𝐜𝐨𝐫𝐞 and 𝐝𝐨 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐜𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐦𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐥𝐲 𝐧𝐞𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞 the use of significant tools or machineries.

In the recent case of 𝑫𝒆𝒍𝒆𝒓𝒂 𝒗. 𝑷𝒉𝒊𝒍𝒊𝒑𝒑𝒊𝒏𝒆 𝑭𝒐𝒓𝒆𝒎𝒐𝒔𝒕 𝑴𝒊𝒍𝒍𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝑪𝒐𝒓𝒑., 𝑮.𝑹. 𝑵𝒐. 𝟐𝟓𝟖𝟒𝟖𝟏, 𝑵𝒐𝒗𝒆𝒎𝒃𝒆𝒓 𝟏𝟎, 𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟓, the Supreme Court affirmed with modifications the Court of Appeals’ pronouncement that MMA is an independent contractor and the true employer of petitioners. Here, Delera and Quiling filed a complaint for illegal dismissal with money claims case due to their floating status and failure of the parties to reach any settlement.

The Court holds that substantial investment in equipment is not indispensable for the performance of the tasks of a Feed Mill Bagger and a Pollard Stacker. What is determinative is that MMA has substantial capital, operates as an independent contractor, and the one that exercised the four-fold test of employment over petitioners, thereby meeting the requisites of legitimate job contracting under the law. Afterall, MMA is presumed to have complied with all the requirements of a legitimate job contractor considering the Certificate of Registration issued to it by the DOLE.

For more legal updates, follow us today!

20/05/2026

#𝑪𝒐𝒏𝒅𝒖𝒄𝑻𝒐𝑲𝒏𝒐𝒘 #𝑾𝒐𝒓𝒅𝑶𝒇𝑻𝒉𝒆𝑾𝒆𝒆𝒌: 𝑮𝒓𝒂𝒗𝒆 𝑻𝒉𝒓𝒆𝒂𝒕𝒔

𝐆𝐫𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐓𝐡𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐬 refers to the crime of threatening another with the infliction upon the person, honor or property of the latter or of his family of any wrong amounting to a crime, punishable under Article 282 of the Revised Penal Code.

In the case of 𝘐𝘴𝘳𝘢𝘦𝘭 𝘷. 𝘗𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘗𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘱𝘱𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘴, G.R. No. 265736, November 19, 2025, the Supreme Court ruled that 𝐧𝐨𝐧-𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐛𝐚𝐥 𝐠𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞𝐬 𝐦𝐚𝐲 𝐛𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐬. Article 282 does not distinguish between threats performed through verbal and non-verbal gestures. Instead, what it punishes is the communication of a threat made with the intention of intimidating its recipient.

Here, following the case for damages filed against Israel due to the alleged construction defects on the building owned by Navez and Denonville, Israel would make threatening gestures – as if holding a gun and pulling the trigger and drawing a line across his neck with a hand. Both RTC and Court of Appeals affirmed MTC’s decision finding Israel guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Grave Threats, however, the Supreme Court acquits him for failure of the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt the mens rea in relation to Grave Threats under Article 282 of the Revised Penal Code.

Moreover, The Supreme Court sustained that 𝐭𝐡𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐬 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐆𝐫𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐓𝐡𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐬. The CA and lower courts precisely failed to fully appreciate the context of Israel’s gestures. It is not disputed that on the date he performed the gestures, he was nearly ran by Navez and Denonville. Hence, there is no evidence of his persistence in carrying out the threats made by his gestures.

18/05/2026

#𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐓𝐨𝐊𝐧𝐨𝐰 #𝐋𝐞𝐠𝐚𝐥𝐔𝐩𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐞: 𝐁𝐈𝐑 𝐑𝐌𝐂 𝐍𝐨. 𝟑𝟖-𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟓

The BIR has issued 𝐑𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐮𝐞 𝐌𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐮𝐦 𝐂𝐢𝐫𝐜𝐮𝐥𝐚𝐫 (𝐑𝐌𝐂) 𝐍𝐨. 𝟑𝟖-𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟔, requiring all online businesses, digital content creators, freelancers, and e-commerce merchants to display the new 𝑩𝑰𝑹 𝑹𝒆𝒈𝒊𝒔𝒕𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑺𝒆𝒂𝒍 𝑩𝒂𝒅𝒈𝒆 on their platforms. Acting like a digital verification checkmark, this badge allows the public to securely confirm a seller's tax compliance via an embedded QR code, while protecting sensitive information like home addresses and TIN numbers from public view.

The mandate applies to anyone generating income electronically, including vloggers, platform merchants, and online service providers. Taxpayers can generate this compliance badge free of charge through the BIR’s Online Registration and Update System (ORUS). To ensure uninterrupted operations and maintain consumer trust, businesses are advised to secure and post their badges in highly visible sections of their pages. For assistance with your digital tax compliance, Conducto Law Office is here to guide you.

Address

2nd Floor, Madrid Building, 88 M. L. Quezon Street
Antipolo
1870

Opening Hours

Monday	9am - 5pm
Tuesday	9am - 5pm
Thursday	9am - 5pm
Friday	9am - 5pm

Website

https://conductolaw.com/

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Conducto Law Office posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Shortcuts

Want your business to be the top-listed Finance Company in Antipolo?